The National Union (, UN) was the sole legal party of the Estado Novo regime in Portugal, founded in July 1930 and dominated by António de Oliveira Salazar during most of its existence. Unlike in most single-party regimes, the National Union was more of a political arm of the government rather than holding actual power over it. The National Union membership was mostly drawn from local notables: landowners, professionals and businessmen, Catholics, monarchists or conservative republicans. The National Union was never a militant or very active organization.
Once Salazar assumed the premiership, the National Union became the only party legally allowed to function under the Estado Novo. Salazar announced that the National Union would be the antithesis of a political party. The NU became an ancillary body, not a source of political power. At no stage did it appear that Salazar wished it to fulfill the central role the fascist party had acquired in Mussolini's Italy; in fact, it was meant to be a platform of conservatism, not a revolutionary vanguard.
The National Union's ideology was corporatism, and it took as many inspirations from Catholic encyclicals such as Rerum novarum and Quadragesimo anno as well as from Mussolini's corporate state. Unlike fascist parties, the National Union played no role in the government: it only served as a tool for the selection of National Assembly deputies, as well as a way to provide some legitimacy to non-competitive elections that Salazar's regime regularly held. The National Union was set up to control and restrain public opinion rather than to mobilize it, and ministers, diplomats and civil servants were never compelled to join the party.
According to António Costa Pinto, the National Union was a moribund party, created by a governmental decree rather than by political activists, and which was "dominated by the administration, put to sleep and reawakened in accordance with the situation at the time". He describes the party as "an empty, undermined space into which were formally sent those who wanted to join the regime and which, once full, was closed". Pinto notes that the army was kept away from public life, and political activity was prohibited outside public life. This included the National Union, which lacked any kind of political activism.
Therefore the party lacked an ideology, and did not mobilize the masses. Pinto argues that it was the opposite, as "in fact demotivation was openly encouraged". He concludes that the party had a "non-fascist nature" and argues that it "neither reached power at all nor, once created, fulfilled functions of control and monopoly of access to power or mobilization of the masses, which, in general, the fascists did."
Scholarly opinion varies on whether the Estado Novo and the National Union should be considered fascist or not. Salazar himself criticized the "exaltation of youth, the cult of force through direct action, the principle of the superiority of state political power in social life, [and] the propensity for organizing masses behind a single leader" as fundamental differences between fascism and the Catholic corporatism of the Estado Novo. Scholars such as Stanley G. Payne, Thomas Gerard Gallagher, Juan José Linz, António Costa Pinto, Roger Griffin, Grzegorz Rossoliński-Liebe and , as well as Howard J. Wiarda, consider the Portuguese Estado Novo conservative authoritarian and not fascist. In his The Anatomy of Fascism, Robert Paxton express the same view, writing that Salazar's regime was "not only nonfascist, but voluntarily nontotalitarian". On the other hand, Portuguese scholars like Fernando Rosas, Manuel Villaverde Cabral, Manuel de Lucena, Manuel Loff and Raquel Varela think that the Estado Novo should be considered fascist.
Ideology
Salazar's political philosophy formed the ideological foundation of the Estado Novo and, by extension, defined the institutional role of the National Union as a supporting organ rather than an autonomous ideological movement. Deeply influenced by Catholic social doctrine, particularly the papal encyclicals Rerum novarum (1891) and Quadragesimo anno (1931), Salazar advocated a corporatist and hierarchical social order intended to harmonize relations between social groups while avoiding class conflict. This system rejected both liberal capitalism and socialism, instead promoting cooperation between occupational and social bodies within a unified national framework.
Central to this worldview was the concept of integral nationalism, influenced by Portuguese integralist thought and the ideas of French thinker, Charles Maurras, which emphasized national unity, hierarchy, tradition, and opposition to liberal democracy. The regime rejected liberal parliamentarism, political pluralism, and socialism, advocating instead an organic conception of society in which individuals were represented through corporative institutions rather than political parties. These principles reflected broader intellectual influences from movements such as Integralismo Lusitano, which combined nationalism, traditionalism, monarchism, and anti-liberalism.
The corporatist constitution of 1933 institutionalized these ideological principles, establishing the Estado Novo as an authoritarian, anti-parliamentarian regime based on representation through functional social groups rather than electoral competition. The corporatist system sought to integrate workers, employers, and professional organizations into state-supervised bodies that regulated economic and social relations while subordinating independent political activity to state authority. Although corporatism was presented as a mechanism for social harmony, political power remained concentrated in the executive leadership.
Catholicism played a central role in shaping the regime's political culture and institutional framework, and the Estado Novo is widely described as authoritarian and conservative in character. The regime's close alignment with Catholic social thought and moral principles has sometimes been described as a form of National Catholicism, although it maintained formal separation between church and state. Salazar's ideological outlook emphasized social order, discipline, and national unity, rejecting revolutionary transformation and mass political mobilization. From the 1950s onward, official ideology increasingly incorporated the concepts of Lusotropicalism and pluricontinentalism, which were used to justify Portugal's retention of its overseas empire and to portray Portuguese colonialism as uniquely integrative and multiracial. These ideas reinforced the regime's emphasis on national unity across its metropolitan and colonial territories.
While the Estado Novo shared certain structural similarities with other authoritarian and corporatist regimes, including close cooperation with Catholic institutions and the rejection of liberal democracy, its ideological character remains the subject of scholarly debate. Some historians have noted parallels with clerical fascism due to its authoritarianism, corporatism, and nationalist orientation, while others emphasize its conservative, traditionalist, and non-revolutionary character.
Within this ideological framework, the National Union functioned primarily as an administrative and political instrument designed to support and legitimize the regime rather than to formulate doctrine or mobilize mass participation. It reflected the broader ideological principles of integral nationalism, corporatism, and authoritarian conservatism while serving to coordinate political representation within the controlled institutional structure of the Estado Novo. As noted by historian António Costa Pinto, the National Union lacked independent political initiative and functioned principally as an extension of state authority rather than an autonomous ideological organization.
Secularism
The Estado Novo maintained cooperative relations with the Catholic Church while formally preserving the principle of secularism established during the republican period. In 1940, the regime signed a concordat with the Holy See, which normalized relations after decades of tension and granted the Church institutional protections and recognition. However, the concordat did not establish Catholicism as the official religion nor did it overturn the constitutional separation of church and state. Salazar himself supported maintaining the formal legal distinction between religious and political authority, consistent with the Portuguese constitution.
thumb|left|Logo of the People's National Action, in use from 1970
The opposition Movement of Democratic Unity was legal between 1945 and 1948, but even then, the political system was so heavily rigged that it had no realistic chance of winning.
The party won all seats in elections to the National Assembly of Portugal from 1934 to 1973. Opposition candidates were nominally allowed after 1945 but prematurely withdrew in the 1945 and 1973 legislative elections. In 1970, two years after Salazar had been replaced as a leader and prime minister by Marcelo Caetano, the name of the party was changed to Acção Nacional Popular ("People's National Action"). Subsequent to Salazar's retirement, the party faced formal competition in the 1969 legislative election. However, the conduct of this election was little different from past contests, with the ANP winning all constituencies in a landslide.
Under Caetano, the party and the regime further softened its rule; the police is reported to "have become more respectful of legality [...] and would spare systematically moderate opponents", and the People's National Action proclaimed that it would move "toward a degree of pluralism". Censorship was softened, political debates occurred, while strikes and demonstrations came to be tolerated. Caetano also permitted the formation of a non-state labor movement, the General Confederation of the Portuguese Workers. Compared to Salazar, Caetano presided over "a far more open, more pluralist, more socially just system".
The most important ideological change that Caetano implemented was reforming Salazar's syndicalism: in 1969, Caetano gave the state syndicates a right to elect their own leadership without government approval. Graham and Makler wrote that this reform proved revolutionary: "Within months the sindicatos, which for decades had been trade unions in name only, began to be transformed from amorphous government agencies into genuine instruments of the workers. For the first time opposition elements, including Communists in the case of some sindicatos, swept the union elections, and the elections were allowed to stand." Wage disputes were also reformed, and the workers' syndicates would not select their own representatives in the disputes, granting independent bargaining power. Caetano also introduced a vast range of new social programs, and ensured their enforcement.
Caetano has been described as a "frustrated liberal" who was willing to but unable to implement the process of democratization, and who was thwarted in his reforms by the salazarista forces. Ultimately, he was unable to move forward with his reforms, and he came to preside over "liberalization without democratization". The political gridlock that Caetano encountered, together with the colonial wars, growing factionalism and the growth of independent labor movement, resulted in "the total incapacity of the Caetano regime to find a political solution."
The party had no real philosophy apart from support for the regime. The National Syndicalist leader, Francisco Rolão Preto criticized the National Union in 1945 as a "grouping of moderates of all parties, bourgeois without soul or faith in the national and revolutionary imperatives of our time".
As a result of its lack of ideology, it disappeared in short order after the Portuguese Revolution of 1974. It has never been revived, and no party claiming to be its heir has won any seats in the Assembly of the Republic in modern Portugal.
Presidents
{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center;"
|-
! rowspan="2" |
! rowspan="2" | Portrait
! rowspan="2" | Name<br>
! colspan="3" | Term
! rowspan="2" | Political party
|-
! Took office
! Left office
! Time in office
|-
|}
Electoral history
Presidential elections
{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center"
!Election
!Party candidate
!Popular vote
!%
!Result
|-
! colspan="5" |President elected by popular vote
|-
!1928
| rowspan="4" |Óscar Carmona
|761,730
| 100%
|Elected
|-
!1935
|653,754
|100%
|Elected
|-
!1942
|829,042
|100%
|Elected
|-
!1949
|761,730
|100%
|Elected
|-
!1951
|Francisco Craveiro Lopes
|761,730
|100%
|Elected
|-
!1958
|Américo Tomás
|765,081
|76.42%
|Elected
|-
! colspan="5" |President elected by National Assembly
|-
!1965
| rowspan="2" |Américo Tomás
|556
|97.7%
|Elected
|-
!1972
|616
|92.1%
|Elected
|}
National Assembly elections
{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:center; width:74%; border=1px #AAAAFF solid"
|-
!Election
!Party leader
!Popular vote
!%
!Seats won
!+/–
!Position
!Result
|-
!1934
| rowspan="9" |António Salazar
|476,706
| 100%
|
| 100
| 1st
|
|-
!1938
|694,290
|100%
|
|
| 1st
|
|-
!1942
|758,215
|100%
|
|
| 1st
|
|-
!1945
|489,133
|100%
|
| 20
| 1st
|
|-
!1949
|927,264
|100%
|
|
| 1st
|
|-
!1953
|845,281
|100%
|
|
| 1st
|
|-
!1957
|911,618
|100%
|
|
| 1st
|
|-
!1961
|973,997
|100%
|
| 10
| 1st
|
|-
!1965
|998,542
|100%
|
|
| 1st
|
|-
!1969
| rowspan="2" style="text-align:center;" |Marcelo Caetano
|981,263
|87.99%
|
|
| 1st
|
|-
!1973
|1,393,294
|100%
|
| 20
| 1st
|
|}
References
Sources
- online free